Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Sun Dec 21, 2014 8:34 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2852 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 ... 115  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:14 am
Posts: 19179
Location: Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Plook wrote:
...I speak for no one else, but I say his position is indefensible.

Well, bully for you!

_________________
You're probably wondering why I'm here
(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5857
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Disco Boy wrote:
I like and respect most of the people on this forum and they like and respect me. I've been here since the beginning, which was 10 years ago.



Image

Did Disco Isaac just pull out the "I'm a respected member" card? :lol: :mrgreen:

The last time Isaac did that he had a complete meltdown and posted 227 posts in two days. :P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 21478
Location: Somewhere in time
just plain doug wrote:
Plook wrote:
...I speak for no one else, but I say his position is indefensible.

Well, bully for you!



I really like you Doug but I take this subject very serious and no one is going to use those techniques on me and I am calling him out for using a child.

I will not waiver on the issue of children anymore than I would for violence against women.

I’ve been there, I big brothered a half black boy in a town that is still racist and had an extreme racist edge in the 90’s and KU can testify to that. I not only dealt with verbal assaults but full on physical threats, all bullies.

I raised daughters who this Hoboken Town wanted them to subjugate themselves to the males and let the star football player have his way, mine gave one a black eye on the bus for trying to touch her and she proudly took the zero tolerance suspension to stop the bully.

One of the girls my wife and I had live with us due to home problems (4 years) came over crying saying her stepfather stole the diaper money to buy drugs. I went to the drug house, I entered the den full of desperate many criminals, I faced the fear and it was easy because some bullies stole from a baby.

I know the MO and I understand their techniques, maybe you all don’t recognize the bully, but know him well in many forms and when challenged he is a coward.

:smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:52 pm
Posts: 2064
Really, how does anyone have time for this? SPACEBROTHER dissects my post, atributes to me some quotes that are not mine, and sends me off again with another cheap statistic, as if it really means something. Plook attempts to defame me as some sort of ignorant mysogenist, comparing me with the coiner of "forcible rape", whoever that person was, long long ago.

What's the fucking point?

Here's something the Americans here should consider. Canadians see us as we are. We should all consider how others see us, instead of looking at ourselves and taking that as actuality.

I've pretty much had it. I don't have time for it. I already said "uncle". Yes, I'm guilty of being an asshole, though I certainly do not think I've been as stinky as some others have been. This should not be about me or anyone else. It has been about this bogus American election, and the fact that most Americans have no clue about it.

The Germans, when Hitler reigned, thought they were free and righteous. America, at this time, is very much the same...they cannot see themselves as others do.











"Don't wanna be an American Idiot, one nation controlled by the media..." - Green Day, American Idiot


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4970
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
There are Canadians and then there are Canadians...
There are Germans and then there are Germans...
There are US Americans and then there are US Americans...
There are Britons and then are Britons...

The reason some people are going after other people has to do with...

a) how much some people are prepared to laugh at themselves...
b) how much some people are prepared to ridicule others...
c) how much some people are prepared to repeat themselves, leading to accusations that they are repeating themselves...

An individual can bully.
A group can bully too.

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1016
The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:
Oh, pedro2, yer such a moron.


The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:
I couldn't care less that you are a bitter selfish slob.


Ronald Noomies wrote:

Hands down, it's Pedro. Rope and DB don't bother me, as they both have enough self awareness to have a conversation regardless of their POV. Pedro is riddled with blind spots as wide as Gov. Cristie's waistline. It's pathological.


Uncle Bernie wrote:
Ronald Noomies wrote:
Amen. Every person who endeavers to discuss anything with Pedro eventually comes to the same conclusion that Arkay describes.


ain't this the zomby troof! and along comes bravo sierra as trusty sidekick...let me be your little dog, honey til your big dog comes



Uncle Bernie wrote:
.

dear pedro, all your bullshit about providing evidence is just that...bullshit! .


polydigm wrote:

Ultimately, if your head is not up your arse, it's not about money, it's about what you enjoy.

You have a very limited and sick view of human nature.



Gosh , with all these hateful words , there seem to be a lot of bullies on this forum .

Good thing I was born with thick skin.

:lol:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 2:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:14 am
Posts: 19179
Location: Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Never fear, Pedro. Plook will rush to your aid, and smite them with words.

(I realise he'll stop liking me for these sorts of comments, but I just don't dig the "love me, or you're a bully" way of living.)

_________________
You're probably wondering why I'm here
(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5857
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
A rope leash wrote:
Really, how does anyone have time for this? SPACEBROTHER dissects my post, atributes to me some quotes that are not mine, and sends me off again with another cheap statistic, as if it really means something. Plook attempts to defame me as some sort of ignorant mysogenist, comparing me with the coiner of "forcible rape", whoever that person was, long long ago.

What's the fucking point?

Here's something the Americans here should consider. Canadians see us as we are. We should all consider how others see us, instead of looking at ourselves and taking that as actuality.

I've pretty much had it. I don't have time for it. I already said "uncle". Yes, I'm guilty of being an asshole, though I certainly do not think I've been as stinky as some others have been. This should not be about me or anyone else. It has been about this bogus American election, and the fact that most Americans have no clue about it.

The Germans, when Hitler reigned, thought they were free and righteous. America, at this time, is very much the same...they cannot see themselves as others do.











"Don't wanna be an American Idiot, one nation controlled by the media..." - Green Day, American Idiot


Quotes that aren't your's? You're kidding, right?

from here...viewtopic.php?p=538134#p538134

A rope leash wrote:
What exactly in that statement makes you think I hate blacks and Muslims?

Are you trying to piss me off?

I hate all people equally, but you are beginning to carve out a special place in my heart....

The simple fact is, I don't enter into political arguments to be defamed and libeled by idiots.

You don't know a goddamned thing about me, but you think you can call me a racist bigot? Your evidence is a post about Obama's religious beliefs?

What the fuck is wrong with you? Your boy is probably going to win the election, but that isn't enough for you? You have to condemn everyone who is not for your boy? How very Soviet of you!

Well, let me say this, SPACEBROTHER...you are the most misguided, gullible, brainwashed, and completely errant fool I've ever seen wasting time posting on an obscure rock star fan forum. Your mind is totally controlled. You believe everything the corporate media tells you, and you actually think Democratic party propaganda is seriously factual.

It's apples and oranges to me, and I've done what I can to show you the difference, but you are just to stupid to learn.

But, know this motherfucker, I don't take kindly to accusations of racism and bigotry. I'm a lot less racist than you, dickhead. I tend to hate people on an individual basis, after I get to know them, and while I don't know you, I usually don't like ignorant people who think they have a corner on truth. It sickens me.

So why don't you go fuck yourself, you whiney prick?


Yeah whatever man. :roll:

Bottom line, is you didn't like my criticisms of Ron paul, and you took it personally. It's the same case with the *cough* "Respected Member".


I can share links to the other posts of yours I quoted, if you need me to jog your memory to what you said and when you said it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 2:41 pm
Posts: 15119
It all means nothing.

_________________
One of the sanest, surest, and most generous joys of life comes from being happy over the good fortune of others.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3699
Location: Vancouver, BC
tweedle-dee wrote:
Disco Boy (MISQUOTE): wrote:
RETURN. OF. THE. SON. OF. ONE. MORE. TIME. FOR. THE. WORLD.:

...Are you THAT stupid? take responsibility for your actions, asshole!


"Bullying is the use of coercion to abuse or intimidate others. The behavior can be habitual and it can include verbal harassment..."

:smoke:


RETURN. OF. THE. RETURN. OF. THE. SON. OF. ONE. MORE. TIME. FOR. THE. WORLD.:

I'm NOT bullying you or anyone else. And you COMPLETELY missed the point as to why I posted that pic. But of course, this is you...so you jump to outrageous conclusions. And also, yet ANOTHER misquote to divert the attention away from your completely bogus accusations that I stated, "half-truths" & "out right lies." Do you seriously except to throw shit at someone and not get called out for it? Are you THAT stupid?

This would have NEVER happened if you hadn't accused me of the aforementioned shit. STOP acting like a victim and take responsibility for your actions, asshole! :roll:

A rope leash wrote:
Really, how does anyone have time for this? SPACEBROTHER dissects my post, atributes to me some quotes that are not mine, and sends me off again with another cheap statistic, as if it really means something. Plook attempts to defame me as some sort of ignorant mysogenist, comparing me with the coiner of "forcible rape", whoever that person was, long long ago.

What's the fucking point?

Here's something the Americans here should consider. Canadians see us as we are. We should all consider how others see us, instead of looking at ourselves and taking that as actuality.

I've pretty much had it. I don't have time for it. I already said "uncle". Yes, I'm guilty of being an asshole, though I certainly do not think I've been as stinky as some others have been. This should not be about me or anyone else. It has been about this bogus American election, and the fact that most Americans have no clue about it.

The Germans, when Hitler reigned, thought they were free and righteous. America, at this time, is very much the same...they cannot see themselves as others do.











"Don't wanna be an American Idiot, one nation controlled by the media..." - Green Day, American Idiot



Yep.

I think tweedle-dee (aka, Plook) is seriously mentally ill. He's hypocritical, extremely judgemental, generalizes more than ANY person I've ever encountered, can't back up his erroneous claims / accusations about me to save his life, purposely misquotes me and hides from and ignores the points I've been making. And last but not least, he claims just about everyone is a bully because they call him out when he's full of shit...


Meanwhile, tweedle-dumb (aka, SPACEBROTHER) is STILL ignoring reality...

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Last edited by Disco Boy on Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:51 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 21478
Location: Somewhere in time
just plain doug wrote:
Never fear, Pedro. Plook will rush to your aid, and smite them with words.

(I realise he'll stop liking me for these sorts of comments, but I just don't dig the "love me, or you're a bully" way of living.)



No there is a difference between using foul language or just calling someone an asshole and systematically bullying using threats, insult, or harassment. The aggressive expression toward others that don’t rely on physical strength or even physical contact. Armed with the Internet, a bully quickly and aggressively spread rumors, threats, hate, or embarrassing photos.

Db has done all of these, culminating with a photo of a disabled child!

What is it when it comes to molestation, violent rape, abuse, and bullying and this forum? Every time it is parsed and dissected to find when it’s acceptable, it is never!

If you’re a man you’re supposed to defend the weak and champion them, fortunately for me I can defend myself, god help a child or a small pet put in the charge of such spinelessness.

Maybe I’m just a relic from a different time when one walked bravely into the fight, instead of trying to find excuses why we can except deviant behavior and not be bothered.


:smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 2466
Plook wrote:
trying to find excuses why we can except (sic) deviant behavior and not be bothered.


Perhaps because we listen to Frank Zappa music.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 3:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1016
This ' bullying ' epidemic that some on here are trying to promote as a social disease is, in my opinion , just another symptom of the nanny state trying to force it's values on others.

Is there bullying in the world ? Depends on how you see it.

What I see happening is the propelling of ' victim-ism ' in the world where everybody needs some sort of protection from some assumed danger.

I'm 5'8 150 lbs and have backed down huge MFers , not with fists , but with words. If you choose to be a victim and let someone call you names ( oh my , how deadly :roll: ) , you will certainly grow into a very dependent adult. Hmmm , that word ' choice ' is creeping around again.

True bullying can be a problem , but some of the ' perceived ' bullying ' is usually attributed to low self esteem and a lack of confidence. Instead of being taught in school how to be a victim , maybe the focus should be on defending one's self with words.
Ah , but then you would have to teach reading and comprehension in school. :roll:

Damn , I guess I got it wrong , again. :wink:


Some of you might remember the Smothers brothers show and the ' Mom always liked you best ' routine.

Today that would be viewed as being a victim.

We're so advanced , aren't we ? :lol:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 21478
Location: Somewhere in time
pedro2 wrote:
This ' bullying ' epidemic that some on here are trying to promote as a social disease is, in my opinion , just another symptom of the nanny state trying to force it's values on others.

Is there bullying in the world ? Depends on how you see it.

What I see happening is the propelling of ' victim-ism ' in the world where everybody needs some sort of protection from some assumed danger.

I'm 5'8 150 lbs and have backed down huge MFers , not with fists , but with words. If you choose to be a victim and let someone call you names ( oh my , how deadly :roll: ) , you will certainly grow into a very dependent adult. Hmmm , that word ' choice ' is creeping around again.

True bullying can be a problem , but some of the ' perceived ' bullying ' is usually attributed to low self esteem and a lack of confidence. Instead of being taught in school how to be a victim , maybe the focus should be on defending one's self with words.
Ah , but then you would have to teach reading and comprehension in school. :roll:

Damn , I guess I got it wrong , again. :wink:



Some of you might remember the Smothers brothers show and the ' Mom always liked you best ' routine.

Today that would be viewed as being a victim.

We're so advanced , aren't we ? :lol:


Like I said I can take care of myself, I detected the bully MO long ago in the attacks and I did fine on my own...but when he used a disabled child he crossed the line and I called him out, like I say in my role as a man I have always defended those who can least defend themselves from this type of coward.

With attitude many here have, god help a child or a small pet put in the charge of such spinelessness.

:smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5857
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Nanny state and victim-ism huh? Thats why Isaac created more than one account here, including his Disco Boy persona. :roll:


I guess it makes a good distraction on the forum to avoid discussing how much worse Mitt Romney is going to be as president than Bush was, and the loss of 30 million more jobs and another full scale ground assault on Iran, because Republican businessmen like to steal oher peoples stuff, and treat non-caucasions and females and lower-middle class/poor people as sub-humans to be written off as open targets for ethnic/class cleansing.

When Romney gets elected, prepare yourselves for a lot more of this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8h7RAiFB8TU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:14 am
Posts: 19179
Location: Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Plook wrote:
...but when he used a disabled child he crossed the line and I called him out, like I say in my role as a man I have always defended those who can least defend themselves from this type of coward.

So, DB used a photo of a mentally handicapped person to make a reference to downer mydnyte, and you feel the kid in the photo is being bullied? Wow...you must have a really low opinion of downer mydnyte! :shock:

_________________
You're probably wondering why I'm here
(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:52 pm
Posts: 2064
...uhmmm...SPACEBROTHER...I admitted my participation in personal defamation. Big deal, but you attacked first, calling me a racist and a bigot, simply because I chose to support someone you THINK is a bigot and a racist.

I don't take kindly to charges of racism. You got what you deserved on that one.

I am not a racist, not any more than you are. I am also not Disco Boy, and Disco Boy is not Isaac.

The way I see it, you are deluded. You find it impossible that so many people could disagree with you, so you make up scenarios of conspiracy to explain it. It's ridiculous, and you look silly.

If we compare posting styles, the person SPACEBROTHER looks most like is Disco Boy...lots of quotes, lots of pics, lots of yelling, lots of personal insults...by this I could claim that SPACEBROTHER is Disco Boy...and wouldn't that be just about appropriate?

Anyway, I don't have time for crybabys. You called me a racist, and I socked you back. You can't prove I'm a racist, but I can prove you're a whiney prick...all anyone has to do is read your posts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1016
SPACEBROTHER wrote:
Nanny state and victim-ism huh? Thats why Isaac created more than one account here, including his Disco Boy persona. :roll:


I guess it makes a good distraction on the forum to avoid discussing how much worse Mitt Romney is going to be as president than Bush was, and the loss of 30 million more jobs and another full scale ground assault on Iran, because Republican businessmen like to steal oher peoples stuff, and treat non-caucasions and females and lower-middle class/poor people as sub-humans to be written off as open targets for ethnic/class cleansing.

When Romney gets elected, prepare yourselves for a lot more of this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8h7RAiFB8TU


Where the hell do you get this bullshit ??
You are so brainwashed you make Pavlov's dogs look like geniuses.

Yes , nanny state and victim-ism . If you , as a parent , present your child with a picture of life as a rose , and omit the thorns , ie. mean people , you should be charged with the dumbing down of your offspring. If that is the case , don't expect me to walk around on eggshells around your ' special ' little brat just because you weren't adult enough to pass along the bad things in life as well as the good things.

As for Obummer , Spacebro , you can have him. I've seen the hoax and chains and will try my luck with the other guy.

You just can't admit to the fact that your guy can fuck up as much as a white guy , can you ? :P

Oh , wait , was that racist ??

Guess what ? I don't really care anymore. I'm a nazi , remember ? :lol:


Oh , by the way , you said " another full scale ground assault on Iran " .

I must be too young to remember the 1st one. :roll:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3699
Location: Vancouver, BC
just plain doug wrote:
tweedle-dee wrote:
...but when he used a disabled child he crossed the line and I called him out, like I say in my role as a man I have always defended those who can least defend themselves from this type of coward.

So, DB used a photo of a mentally handicapped person to make a reference to downer mydnyte, and you feel the kid in the photo is being bullied? Wow...you must have a really low opinion of downer mydnyte! :shock:


And that just about sums up the absolute ridiculousness of tweedle-dee's (aka, Plook) posts about me. What a mental case...

A rope leash wrote:
...uhmmm...SPACEBROTHER...I admitted my participation in personal defamation. Big deal, but you attacked first, calling me a racist and a bigot, simply because I chose to support someone you THINK is a bigot and a racist.

I don't take kindly to charges of racism. You got what you deserved on that one.

I am not a racist, not any more than you are. I am also not Disco Boy, and Disco Boy is not Isaac.

The way I see it, you are deluded. You find it impossible that so many people could disagree with you, so you make up scenarios of conspiracy to explain it. It's ridiculous, and you look silly.

If we compare posting styles, the person SPACEBROTHER looks most like is Disco Boy...lots of quotes, lots of pics, lots of yelling, lots of personal insults...by this I could claim that SPACEBROTHER is Disco Boy...and wouldn't that be just about appropriate?

Anyway, I don't have time for crybabys. You called me a racist, and I socked you back. You can't prove I'm a racist, but I can prove you're a whiney prick...all anyone has to do is read your posts.


Almost exactly spot on.

Meanwhile, tweedle-dumb (aka, SPACEBROTHER) is STILL denying reality...

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:28 pm
Posts: 2674
Location: in the tiny dirt somewhere
Image

_________________
_________________Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5857
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
The thing is pedor2, is that Obama didn't fuck-up. Your sides created this whole Obama fucked-up hoax since before he got in office. You knew Bush handed Obama two wars and a collapsing economy. You knew that Bush failed to get Bin Laden. You also knew that unemployment was higher when Obama took office than it is now.

As far as I'm concerned, the only thing slowing the rebound of the economy are obstructionist republicans. I know, tou remember Bush using the phrase obstructionists when Bush used it. But Bush used the same tactic that Republicans always use, and thats to blame the other side for what they themsaelves did. Unlike you, I actually have voted across party lines over the years, but finally saw the light after the disasterous decade called the '80s. You should come over to the side of the good guys. I'm sure there has to be some shred of good left in your heart. Life isn't a complete pile of shit. it's only that way when you want to live in the 1950's. We're closer to 2050 than we are 1950. Time to let go and move forward...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1016
Obama doesn't even meet with congress , submits a budget that no one voted for , and passes ' executive orders ' in the middle of the night because he can't get things done in a partisan way.

Democrats , like Pelosi & Reid , take bills to the table , say this is our plan , no negotiating and if you don't agree with it , you are the party of no.

That's NOT the way to get things done. Republicans have proposed bills that have never seen the light of day BECAUSE of obstructionist leaders like Pelosi and Reid.

How about your side do something like this ? Move forward and get out of the fucking way.

And don't even get me started on the gun running coverup or the Lybia mess. I remember your big postings about how Bush lied.

How about OBAMA LIED

:P

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 3687
Debt and deficit

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5857
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
http://mahilena.typepad.com/blog/2012/1 ... years.html


Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

check out the numbers ....the Democrats have done much better than Republicans
as Deficit Hawks (yet not that I care much since in a Monetarily Sovereign nation Deficits don't matter) but here is the record

"Illustrative of his contempt for the truth, Mitt Romney’s campaign website continues to host the following statement: “Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history.”

On Friday, we discovered yet another reason why this is a super-colossal lie.

With the end of fiscal year 2012, the Congressional Budget Office announced the 2012 federal budget deficit: $1.1 trillion. Taken purely at face value, this number is enormous. Yet every Democrat, and especially the Obama campaign, ought to be telling anyone who will listen: Not only has the president cut the deficit by $312 billion during his first term (so far), but he’s cut the deficit by $200 billion in the past year alone. And the CBO projected that the 2013 Obama budget, if enacted as is, would shrink the deficit to $977 billion — a four year total of nearly $500 billion in deficit reduction.

Okay, yeah, I get it. It’s risky to mention the deficit, but not when you couch it in math and the facts.

As I’ve documented before, the CBO reported in January, 2009 that the federal budget deficit for that fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2008, was already $1.2 trillion. President Obama’s additional ’09 spending added another $200 billion to the deficit, bringing the total to $1.412 trillion. Unprecedented and huge, but given the enormity of the financial crisis and the depth of the recession, there weren’t many other options on the table. Add two wars into the mix and there you go.

But since then, deficit spending has dropped precipitously. Why? Chiefly because President Obama signed the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act in February, 2010, which mandates that new spending be offset with spending cuts or new revenue. Yes, a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress passed this legislation. Guess how many congressional Republicans voted for the law. Zero. Not one. Perhaps during this week’s debate, Vice President Biden could ask Rep. Paul Ryan who voted against the bill.

Consequently, the president is responsible for the lowest government spending growth in 60 years, according to the Wall Street Journal‘s Market Watch.



Once again, Mitt Romney’s website still contains the words: “Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history.” Pants on fire times a thousand.

Fact: the president’s record is exactly the opposite of what Romney says. And how long ago was this statistic released by the Wall Street Journal and subsequently affirmed by fact checkers? Five months ago. On September 26, when asked about his record of mendacious claims, Mitt Romney told CNN’s Jim Acosta, “We’ve been absolutely spot on. And any time there’s been anything that’s been amiss, we correct it or remove it.” Oh yeah? Well, Mr. Romney, you missed a whopper.

Another whopper: during Romney’s “winning” debate against the president last week, he claimed, “The president said he’d cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it.” Another lie. Yes, the president said he’d cut the deficit in half — but he absolutely did not double it. As I’ve outlined here, he’s cut the deficit by 22 percent so far — 35 percent by the end of 2013.

Furthermore, I can name two Democratic presidents who’ve cut the deficit through the duration of their presidencies: Clinton and Obama. And what about Republican presidents? Bush 43? He turned a $200 billion surplus into a $400 billion deficit by the end of his first term, and a $1.2 trillion deficit by the end of his second term. Bush 41? No. Reagan? No. Ford? No. Nixon? No. The last Republican president who cut the deficit was Eisenhower. By the way, I’m sick of hearing the farcical line about Congress “controlling the purse strings.” Any six-year-old child who’s watched a Schoolhouse Rock cartoon knows the president signs all legislation before it becomes law, including appropriations bills. The House can’t magically spend money without a presidential signature. Besides, if the president is to be blamed for the size of the deficit — and the Republicans have been merciless on the president in this area in spite of reality, and their own party’s record — it’s only fair that he should get credit when the deficit is reduced.

Yet without objections, the Romney campaign and the Republicans continue to champion their status as “fiscal hawks” even though the facts prove that to correlate “fiscal responsibility” and “Republican Party” is absurd on its face. Even though Romney’s plan for the deficit and the economy is as shifty, murky and ambiguous as he is, there appears to be nothing — absolutely nothing — about the Romney plan that’s any different from every Republican presidential plan in recent history, but we’re supposed to believe that Romney will cut the deficit anyway. In fact, as we all know by now, Romney is proposing $5 trillion in un-funded tax cuts, as well as massive increases in military spending, and, if Romney wins, you can bet the Republicans will jettison their deficit and debt hawkery into the next nearest memory hole to be forgotten until another Democrat enters the White House.

If the Obama campaign and the Democrats can talk about the deficit in these terms, it undercuts one of the leading Republican attacks and becomes a winning issue for the president. Plus it helps to cement the reality of Mitt Romney The Pathological Liar. "


http://thecontributor.com/repeat-after- ... l-50-years


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 6:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1016
How Much Did Obama Add?

But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.

It can be argued that the total should be lower. Economist Daniel J. Mitchell of the libertarian CATO Institute — who once served on the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee — has put the figure at $140 billion.

Ordinarily, an incoming president has little or no influence over spending that was approved under his predecessor. So in normal circumstances, all spending for fiscal year 2009 would have been rightly tied to Bush, and fiscal 2010 would be the first year for which Obama would have prepared a budget and signed the major spending bills. And for the most part, big spending programs that require no yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, did indeed continue to operate during fiscal 2009 under the policies in effect under Bush.

But in Obama’s case, he quickly pushed through Congress and signed a large economic stimulus measure containing a combination of tax cuts and new spending in fiscal 2009. And while Bush had signed full-year appropriations for the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security and veterans programs, he had left the remainder of government agencies that need annual appropriations funded only through March 2009.

Here’s how we arrived at our $203 billion total: We combed through all the appropriations bills signed by Obama for 2009, plus other legislation that CBO said also resulted in increased spending. We also examined the budget effects of Obama’s decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler using funds previously appropriated under TARP. And here’s what we found:

$2 billion for children’s health insurance. On Feb. 4, Obama signed a bill expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program, covering millions of additional children (a Democratic bill Bush had vetoed in the previous Congress). “CBO estimates that the act will increase mandatory outlays by $2 billion in 2009,” CBO later stated (page 5).
$114 billion in stimulus spending. Obama signed the stimulus bill Feb. 17. While headlines proclaimed a $787 billion price tag, about 27 percent of the total was actually for tax cuts, not spending. And most of the spending didn’t take place until after fiscal 2009. CBO initially put the total spent in fiscal 2009 at $107.8 billion, but the following year it revised the figure upward to $114 billion, in a report issued in August 2010 (page 13).
$32 billion of the “omnibus” spending bill Obama signed on March 11, 2009, to keep the agencies that Bush had not fully funded running through the remainder of the fiscal year. The $410 billion measure included $32 billion more than had been spent the previous year, according to a floor statement by Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the top-ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee. (See page H2790 in the Congressional Record.) “An 8 percent—or a $32 billion—increase in 1 year on top of the stimulus package is simply unnecessary and unsustainable,” he declared.
A case can be made that Obama shouldn’t be held responsible for the entire $32 billion increase. The $410 billion was only $20 billion more than Bush had requested, according to Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, the appropriations chairman. (See page H2800.) And CBO later figured the increase amounted to only $9 billion over what it was projecting on the assumption that the levels Bush approved for the first part of the year would be extended for the entire year (page 5).
But it was Obama who signed the bill, so we assign responsibility for the full annual increase to him, not Bush.
$2 billion for deposit insurance. The “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act” that Obama signed May 20 had among its many provisions some changes to the federal program that insures bank deposits. CBO later estimated that would increase fiscal 2009 outlays by $2 billion (page 54).
$31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. Obama pushed for and signed on June 24 another spending measure. The press dubbed it a “war funding” bill, but it actually contained $26 billion for non-defense measures (including funding for flu vaccine against the H1N1 virus, and for the International Monetary Fund) in addition to $80 billion for the military.
Only a portion of the total $106 billion it authorized would actually be spent during the remaining three months of fiscal 2009, however. Sen. Kent Conrad, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, stated on June 18: “ The conference report includes $105.9 billion in discretionary budget authority for fiscal year 2009, which will result in outlays in 2009 of $30.5 billion.” (See page S6776.)
Here again, a case can be made that Obama isn’t responsible for the entire $31 billion. Economist Mitchell argues that $25 billion in military spending should be assigned to Bush, because “Bush surely would have asked for at least that much extra spending.” But he didn’t. So rather than speculate, we’ll assign it all to Obama, who asked for it.
$2 billion in additional “Cash for Clunkers” funding. Obama signed this measure Aug. 7, providing “emergency supplemental” funding for a stimulus program that offered $3,500 to $4,500 to car owners who traded in an old car for a new one with higher fuel economy. Nearly all was spent in fiscal 2009. (See page 959.)
$20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts. At one point the government had paid out nearly $80 billion to support the automakers. But some of this was Bush’s doing, and much has been repaid and will be in the future.
Here’s how we arrived at our $20 billion figure for Obama:
By the time Obama took office, Bush already had loaned nearly $21 billion to the two automakers from funds appropriated originally for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and had committed the government to lend $4 billion more. But Bush left decisions on further aid to Obama, who poured in additional billions.
By the end of the fiscal year, the Treasury had made approximately $76 billion in loans and equity investments to GM, Chrysler and their respective financing entities (some had already been repaid). But for budget accounting purposes, not all of this was counted as federal spending under the TARP law. That’s because the government stood to receive loan repayments with interest, and held nearly 61 percent of the stock of the reorganized General Motors. What was counted as spending was — in rough terms — the difference between the estimated future value of those assets to taxpayers and their initial cost.
Treasury put the net cost of the GM and Chrysler support during fiscal 2009 at $45 billion (see page 110, the “Total subsidy cost” line under the heading “AIFP,” for Automotive Industry Financing Program). That’s the amount officially booked as a federal outlay for fiscal 2009.
We assume — we think reasonably — that the $25 billion committed under Bush would have been lost had Obama done nothing. So we subtract the full amount of Bush’s commitment from the net total of $45 billion that Treasury initially estimated for fiscal 2009.
For the record, the ultimate total cost of the auto bailout is now estimated to be lower than initially expected. It is put at $21 billion by the Treasury Department (see page 5) and and only $19 billion by CBO (see Table 3). But those lowered estimates don’t affect what was booked as spending in fiscal 2009.
Other big domestic programs that don’t require yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, continued to operate as they had under Bush. One big fiscal 2009 spending increase resulted from an unusually large 5.8 percent cost of living increase that took effect just before Obama took office. That was an anomaly, as we explained in “Social Security COLA,” posted Sept. 23, 2009, and there would be no COLA at all for the next two years. The same 5.8 percent COLA also was given in 2009 to millions of federal retirees, military retirees and disabled veterans and their survivors.

So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.


http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas ... no-or-not/

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2852 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 ... 115  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group